Talk:Rank-3 scale: Difference between revisions

Line 6:

:: Thank you for taking the time. I think it is possible that a parenthetical remark would fit better here, maybe as ''or another [[equivalence interval]]''. I'm not sure the term “equave” itself (short as it may be) is all that helpful in this case. The question also has the historical or derivation aspect: the octave is established as an equivalence interval in most musical cultures. Even for musically untrained persons, this interval is easy to identify, also with regard to this particularity. --[[User:Xenwolf|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf|talk]]) 21:51, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

::: I think either works, but I have a preference for "[[equave]]" to keep the parenthetical remark concise. Any person not familiar with the term can find quickly, by following the link, that it is synonymous with "interval of equivalence". I'll note that "equave" is fairly common on the Xenharmonic Wiki, even though it is probably not used in academic papers (similarly to the difference between MOS and WF, to some degree): see https://en.xen.wiki/w/Special:WhatLinksHere/Equave. --[[User:Fredg999|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999|talk]]) 18:23, 27 March 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:51, 26 March 2022 view source Xenwolf (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, confirmaccount-notify, Interface administrators, Sysops 8,705 edits →Equave vs Octave: re ← Older edit		Latest revision as of 18:23, 27 March 2022 view source Fredg999 (talk \| contribs) autopatrolled, Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Sysops 6,202 edits re
Line 6:		Line 6:

	:: Thank you for taking the time. I think it is possible that a parenthetical remark would fit better here, maybe as ''or another [[equivalence interval]]''. I'm not sure the term “equave” itself (short as it may be) is all that helpful in this case. The question also has the historical or derivation aspect: the octave is established as an equivalence interval in most musical cultures. Even for musically untrained persons, this interval is easy to identify, also with regard to this particularity. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 21:51, 26 March 2022 (UTC)		:: Thank you for taking the time. I think it is possible that a parenthetical remark would fit better here, maybe as ''or another [[equivalence interval]]''. I'm not sure the term “equave” itself (short as it may be) is all that helpful in this case. The question also has the historical or derivation aspect: the octave is established as an equivalence interval in most musical cultures. Even for musically untrained persons, this interval is easy to identify, also with regard to this particularity. --[[User:Xenwolf\|Xenwolf]] ([[User talk:Xenwolf\|talk]]) 21:51, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

			::: I think either works, but I have a preference for "[[equave]]" to keep the parenthetical remark concise. Any person not familiar with the term can find quickly, by following the link, that it is synonymous with "interval of equivalence". I'll note that "equave" is fairly common on the Xenharmonic Wiki, even though it is probably not used in academic papers (similarly to the difference between MOS and WF, to some degree): see https://en.xen.wiki/w/Special:WhatLinksHere/Equave. --[[User:Fredg999\|Fredg999]] ([[User talk:Fredg999\|talk]]) 18:23, 27 March 2022 (UTC)